Amartya Sen’s perspective on the importance of individual freedoms is more convincing than differing developmental theories. In chapter two of his book Development as Freedom, Sen writes, “Development…is the process of expanding human freedoms, and the assessment of development has to be informed by this consideration” (1999, 36). Sen (1999) explores the relationship between individual freedoms and development, as well as the ways in which freedom is both a fundamental component of development and an enabling springboard to other aspects. Dominant views of development tend to revolve around GDP growth, industrialization, and technological advances. Sen (1999) defies those models, highlighting three themes that I see emerge from his writing: first, urbanization does not mean development; second, social welfare must come before economic growth; third, growth in the community means focusing on social and economic human rights. Framed by these three themes, I argue that Sen’s focus on substantive human freedoms challenges other development theories, such as Modernization’s, idealized set of Eurocentric assumptions about what a developed society ought to include. Continue reading
Development Theory and Actors
Development Theories
Summary: What is development? Definitions of development differ, but are all interrelated. Most people think of development as an economic process. Typically, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and wealth are equated to a country’s level of development. However, this standard erases cultural and spiritual richness from consideration. Countries with low GDPs are considered developing nations, but if cultural wealth were instead evaluated, these same countries may be considered the most developed. Development is a mix of every theory; there are no theories that include every aspect of the process. Continue reading
Development and Development Theory
Despite the ontology of development studies (DS) having an unclear definition and dependent on the disciplinary perspective one takes in engaging in DS, its cross-disciplinary, or the term I prefer, trans-disciplinary nature makes it a fascinating field to delve into. In my studies so far, I have engaged with grand theory in DS—primarily by critiquing purely economics-based theory as western ethnocentrism. As I am warming up to my capstone project and begin background research, however, I intend to grapple with context specific theory to understand how human trafficking of persons with disability can occur in a country which has ratified inclusive development treaties and been an active player advocating for human rights in the international community. Continue reading
Development Theory
Development Studies emerged in an intellectual and political context in the 1960s and has become an integral part of everyday undertakings around the world. More of a subject than a discipline, Development Studies focus on development and create cross-disciplinary insights into the field. There are many different views of development, such as a long-term process of structural societal transformation and short-to-medium term outcomes of desirable targets. It is important to keep both perspectives in mind when attempting to define development. Continue reading
Inclusive Education
If we look at SDG 4, it focuses on “inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” Education, and more importantly equal access to quality education, is a fundamental element of development and plays a key role in advancing the development agenda. Paulo Freire, Brazilian instructor and philosopher, wrote a dissertation “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” where he addressed the importance of education for ensuring quality development for all populations. In his work, he focuses on providing basic education to grown adults who had never gone through the schooling process. The main goal that Freire sought was to not just teach his students fundamental education, but to teach them the ability to think critically. By thinking critically, it gives individuals the ability to not just learn material, but to find the answers to their questions themselves. The ability to think critically is fundamental because it gives individuals freedom. Once they started thinking for themselves, they quickly started to learn how unjust the societal system was and how oppressed they had been. Most of the individuals in his classes worked low tier minimum wage jobs and assumed that there was nothing else that they could do, that this lifestyle was the only thing available to them. However, once they started learning, they realized that learning and education were a significant part of what kept them in a loop of poverty and inequality. Freire takes a very marxist approach to education in that he believes that providing people with the ability to think critically will allow them to revolt against the unjust system that kept them uneducated. By becoming more educated, individuals can become a part of the conversation and advocate for their rights, furthering the development of poor and marginalized regions. In creating an education system that provides the oppressed with the necessary learning to become fully active citizens in society and fight for their rights, it needs to be inclusive, not just to adults and children, but to persons with disabilities, women, immigrants, and all other groups that do not have equal access to education. Education is a pillar to meeting the SDGs because it is the tool that individuals use to solve problems, great and small. It is a way to give marginalized people the freedom to develop themselves as they see fit, and fight against the system that oppresses them, instead of having others fight for their rights.
Development Theory
Development is a concept that lacks a universally accepted definition. Development in terms of countries is defined by Sen as people’s ability to access freedoms of all kinds. Sen’s ideas are based on a theoretical concept of development which includes expanding people’s capabilities and giving them access to tangible freedoms. This means that development is not simply based on economic factors but of social, political, and civil factors that provide people within a country to have freedoms. Increasing freedoms to all people is the basis of inclusive development in which every person has complete access to the freedoms offered by a country.
In a more economical sense, Acemoglu and Robinson claim that development is the inclusivity of economic institutions which allows all people to participate in opportunities. Development has 3 inter- related definitions; long term, short to medium term, and a dominant discourse. Long term development focuses on structural societal change. Short to medium term development utilizes targets and indicators such as the Millennium Development Goals and the Sustainable Development Goals. Dominant discourse development refers more specifically to western ideals of modernization.
Personally, I am more a believer in Sen’s ideals of development as they are more applicable to the diversity of countries and allow for more inclusivity in terms of who has access to the freedoms that developed countries offer.
Development Theory and Actors
All nations aspire to develop and yet what is the criteria in deciding which country is developed and which is less developed? What determinants can accelerate development? And why are some countries more developed over others? The answers to these questions lay in the way we understand the concept of development. The theory and concept of development is complex and as discourse shows there is no single definition on what development is, or what specific measurements it implies. According to the book International Development Studies, development has three inter-related definitions: as a long term process focused on processes of structural societal change; as a a short-to-medium term outcome of desirable targets, which is related to evaluative or indicator led policy (MDG); or as a dominant ‘discourse’ of western modernity, which is related to westernized ethnocentric notions. Robinson and Acemoglu argue that the key to development is the inclusivity of economic institutions, which essentially is the combination of the state and the free market in which the state creates incentives, rewards innovation and allows everyone to participate in economic opportunities. Thus, economic success is due to the government becoming accountable and responsive to its population,
However, the theoretical work of Amarty Sen published in his book Development as Freedom has greatly influenced the contemporary concept of development (which is in accordance with other definitions). According to Sen development is a process of expanding capabilities, creating opportunities but mainly it is the process of expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy. From his perspective real development cannot be just about increasing basic incomes or GNP, but rather that is one of the determinants of expanding the freedoms enjoyed by the society. Other factors such as social, economic, political and civil rights are also important. Thus, he argues that in the end development is about expanding those freedoms and removing the barriers that prevent expanding these sets of freedom. Health, education, housing, freedom of action and belief are no less important for developing nations as growth GDP. These factors are the key factors for inclusive institutions, alleviating poverty, providing economic opportunities and abolishing repressive regimes- that act as barriers to freedom.
Defining Development
According to Sen, development is the expansion of what he calls freedoms to all people. This contrasts with more traditional views of development, which consider increases in income and GNP as clear indicators of effective development policies. These two different approaches to development highlight which indicators are given preference when it comes to designing policies. Sen’s approach is to focus on freedoms and unfreedoms. That is removing barriers so that development can be achieved. Examples of unfreedoms are poverty, tyranny, limited economic and educational opportunities and social deprivation. Sen argues that in the process of reducing the unfreedoms, inputs like increasing income or GNP becomes more valuable. This alternative approach to development stresses that traditional methods take on a new role as a means to expanding freedoms instead of being their own separate solutions for achieving development.
There are three inter-related views of development that these two different approaches can use for their framework: long-term, short to medium-term, and development as discourse. These three different views are all different approaches to development policy. Sen’s approach fits into two of the three categories: long-term and development as discourse. The alternative approach challenges the standard perceptions of development and pushes the development community as a whole to consider different methods. By thinking of development in terms of Sen’s freedoms and unfreedoms, policy makers are able to create more innovative solutions to development challenges.
The level of development can different between countries in a specific region and even within a country itself. Cities often receive most of the development, industrialization and innovation in the developing world, and it is then hoped that the benefits of the urban development will then spread out into the rural areas. The wide range of development makes it difficult to enact any one-blanket policy and hope all aspects of the issue will be solved. Different regions of a country have different development challenges that need their own nuanced solutions. The same is true for similar areas in different parts of the world. The communities might earn the same amount of income and perform similar work, but what works in one area might not work in another. This could also be another challenge of thinking of development policy in terms of income or GDP. While Sen’s idea of unfreedoms and capabilities might not be a traditional approach, it could allow for policy makers and other actors to find more realistic solutions to solving development problems.
The role of institutions in development is to incentivize of positive and inclusive economic growth, rather than extraction led growth. As Acemoglu and Robinson state, “it is politics and political institutions that determine what economic institutions a country has” (p. 43), therefore positive and inclusive political institutions must be developed for positive and inclusive economic growth. Secure property rights are critical to the conception of development Acemoglu and Robinson profess, as this is one of the only ways to incentivize economic activity. The security of property from seizer by either the government or other individuals in society allows for individuals to invest and gain from whatever they may have.
This conception of institutions, and the role they play in creating inclusive development through the creation of incentives fits with the idea “development is a process of structural societal change” (Sumner et al p. 12). Clearly existing extractive institutions of many undeveloped or underdeveloped countries must be transformed into inclusive intuitions through some kind of political transformation, as economic institutions are subordinate to political ones. It would then follow that development actors, from states to NGOs to individuals, should be concentrating political rather than economic development. The transformation of institutions from extractive to inclusive would also fall into Sen’s conception of development, as more inclusive economic institutions would allow greater numbers of people, with a greater diversity of abilities and backgrounds to participate in the economy. The elimination of elite run, extractive institutions would allow individuals to exercise their right to participate in markets and economic transitions.
Institutions then, after being freed from elite control and extractive mandates, must be made to work toward getting as many people as possible to be active in the markets. This can be through the securing of property rights as Acemoglu and Robinson profess, but it can also occur through the enforcement of policies allowing access to markets by those with disability. This transformation of institutions appears to fall inline with development theories that predominated in the 1950s and 1960s in particular (Sumner et al p. 12).
Intersectionality of International Development
Intersectionality in international development is a gathering of different identities and actors to work together to tie together core concepts of development. This is essential for meeting the sustainable development goals before the year 2030 because with the inclusion of all of the concerned subjects of development, the interests of the entire population can be met. In the United Nations Major Groups Framework, there are nine categories that are represented in the decision making of the development policies. Having nine groups encompasses a majority of the groups affected, but these categories are also limiting in terms of who is represented.
In international developmental organizations, the task of resolving international issues is a challenging one, and often the biggest difficulty is making sure that the interests of all concerned groups are met. By having nine groups, it limits the amount of actors present at the decision making table and makes it easier to pass unanimous actions. However, if there are people that are still not represented in the projects and who do not see the benefits of development, then the efficiency gained in having less actors leads to a loss of effectiveness of the programs. The Major Groups Framework tried addressing these issues by including specific groups in the official language and keeping it open to “other stakeholders,” keeping it vague enough to include any multitude of groups. Another way that the UNMGF includes all of the groups is by jointly categorizing groups (i.e. instead of having a separate category for the LGBTQA community, they would be included under the nine groups that compose the UNMGF). The main issue with this is hierarchy, where some groups are given more importance than others, which causes political dissent among the different actors over who should be given priority in developmental issues.
This is still a major barrier to international development and is a main criticism of the way the system works, but it is critical to find a way to maintain intersectionality and efficiency in the global frameworks to find ways to meet the sustainable development goals before the 2030 deadline.
Disability Inclusive Development 
You must be logged in to post a comment.